Literature DB >> 14620352

What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: reference points, frame selection, and framing effects.

Craig R M McKenzie1, Jonathan D Nelson.   

Abstract

Framing effects are well established: Listeners' preferences depend on how outcomes are described to them, or framed. Less well understood is what determines how speakers choose frames. Two experiments revealed that reference points systematically influenced speakers' choices between logically equivalent frames. For example, speakers tended to describe a 4-ounce cup filled to the 2-ounce line as half full if it was previously empty but described it as half empty if it was previously full. Similar results were found when speakers could describe the outcome of a medical treatment in terms of either mortality or survival (e.g., 25% die vs. 75% survive). Two additional experiments showed that listeners made accurate inferences about speakers' reference points on the basis of the selected frame (e.g., if a speaker described a cup as half empty, listeners inferred that the cup used to be full). Taken together, the data suggest that frames reliably convey implicit information in addition to their explicit content, which helps explain why framing effects are so robust.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14620352     DOI: 10.3758/bf03196520

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  11 in total

1.  Perspective in statements of quantity, with implications for consumer psychology.

Authors:  Anthony J Sanford; Nicolas Fay; Andrew Stewart; Linda Moxey
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2002-03

2.  Framing and conflict: aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice.

Authors:  S L Schneider
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  A Bayesian view of covariation assessment.

Authors:  Craig R M McKenzie; Laurie A Mikkelsen
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2006-06-09       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  1998-07

5.  The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior.

Authors:  B E Meyerowitz; S Chaiken
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1987-03

6.  The psychological side of Hempel's paradox of confirmation.

Authors:  C R McKenzie; L A Mikkelsen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-06

7.  Do Conditional Hypotheses Target Rare Events?

Authors:  Craig R. M. McKenzie; Victor S. Ferreira; Laurie A. Mikkelsen; Kristine J. McDermott; Ryan P. Skrable
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  2001-07

8.  On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies.

Authors:  B J McNeil; S G Pauker; H C Sox; A Tversky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1982-05-27       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1981-01-30       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Framing of information: its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients.

Authors:  T M Marteau
Journal:  Br J Soc Psychol       Date:  1989-03
View more
  12 in total

1.  Framing effects in inference tasks--and why they are normatively defensible.

Authors:  Craig R M McKenzie
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-09

2.  Increased sensitivity to differentially diagnostic answers using familiar materials: implications for confirmation bias.

Authors:  Craig R M McKenzie
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-04

3.  Correct acceptance weighs more than correct rejection: a decision bias induced by question framing.

Authors:  Yaakov Kareev; Yaacov Trope
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-02

4.  To err is human; to structurally prime from errors is also human.

Authors:  L Robert Slevc; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Explaining risky choices with judgments: Framing, the zero effect, and the contextual relativity of gist.

Authors:  Valerie F Reyna; Charles J Brainerd; Ziyi Chen; Sarah H Bookbinder
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 3.140

6.  On the role of rarity information in speakers' choice of frame.

Authors:  Hidehito Honda; Toshihiko Matsuka
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-07

7.  On the Supposed Evidence for Libertarian Paternalism.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer
Journal:  Rev Philos Psychol       Date:  2015

8.  Replication Rate, Framing, and Format Affect Attitudes and Decisions about Science Claims.

Authors:  Ralph M Barnes; Stephanie J Tobin; Heather M Johnston; Noah MacKenzie; Chelsea M Taglang
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-11-22

9.  A good tennis player does not lose matches. The effects of valence congruency in processing stance-argument pairs.

Authors:  Naomi Kamoen; Maria Baukje Johanna Mos
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Climatechange vs. Globalwarming: Characterizing Two Competing Climate Discourses on Twitter with Semantic Network and Temporal Analyses#.

Authors:  Wen Shi; Haohuan Fu; Peinan Wang; Changfeng Chen; Jie Xiong
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.